'TIS THE SEASON

Along with holiday jingles and tra-la-las, expect the frequency of online surveys this November/December – and beyond – to escalate.

After all, the 2016 POTUS election is less than 12 months away. 

Today, prognosticators say there will be increased emphasis on gathering online and mobile data, adding to the already $10 billion marketplace (more than telephone and face-to-face opinion-izing combined).  SurveyMonkey and peers have done a great job in selling services to professionals like lawyers who now use this kind of polling for all sorts of matters, from assessing racism in potential jurors to backgrounding those up for judicial appointments. 

As well as to communicators and brand gurus.  At the same time, many of us fail to use these tools wisely – and/or follow the pollsters’ leads.  With a tip of the hat to Advertising Age, here are three rules that might make our employers’ bottom lines ring – and our employees’ experience, a bit more compelling:

• Remember the two Cs – continuity and consistency.  Judging new directions on the results of one or two polls isn’t advisable; asking regularly is.
• Truth rules.  Yeah, it might not be popular – but if what you’re hearing can be readily validated, leaders need to be told and your efforts, guided.
• The wider, the better.  Especially inside business, it can be tough to grab employee attention.  And therefore, very tempting to go to the same-old, same-old for questions.  Expand your horizons – and offer incentives for responses.

What’s real is the data we’re seeking.  Make sure you get the right kind of information to guide decision-making, inside and out.

NO MASKS ON HALLOWEEN?

We go nuts for surveys.

Especially the online kind, where anonymity rules [unless to win that one outta million prize by submitting your email].

We insert comments [never rude, of course].  Ask lots of questions in the “your opinions, please” box.  Give feedback on the type of conclusions we think the surveyer wants.  Ad infinitum.

That obsession (okay, we’re honest) led us to a recent conversation with a client who loves Halloween.  She noted her kids were probably too old to dress up … and “besides, they can’t wear masks.”

Really?

The community, or so goes the explanation, banned full-face coverage (à la Darth Vader) a while back, fearing that when people can’t tell who you are, unruly and uncivil behavior just might follow. 

Which, in our mind, might have been one of the prompts for the current popularity of apps like Secret and Whisper, sites such as Reddit.  All frame e-anonymity as a good thing, with only the reminder to “say something kind.” 

So our curious selves searched psych lit to discover what research could tell us.  Answers surprised us.  According to the professionals, identity masking can encourage participation, boost a certain type of creative thinking, and improve problem solving.  Yeah, and, of course, some risk taking.  Plus psychologists Marco Yzu and Brian Southwell argue that, no matter what the media of anonymity, most of us are still governed by good and basic human principles.

So the next time you craft a “no names revealed” survey  …

LIE TO US (WE DARE YOU!)

These days, software (and a brilliant engineer) can work wonders – or havoc.

A six-year-old program/company that analyzes facial expressions for ad campaigns and TV pilots, though not yet profitable, is getting much traction from the CBS’, Kellogg’s, and Unilevers of this world.  Now boasting a database of 2.5 million facial samples, Affectiva asks its subjects to watch a video on the computer screen while a computer camera watches them back.  Results, claim marketers, are a lot less touchy feely than findings from focus groups or polling.  Future apps?  Politics, education, and psychological conditions like autism.

Facial analysis actually started with the same Charles Darwin who pioneered survival of the fittest.  It continued with professors who’ve looked at almost every form of non-verbal communication known to man (and yes, chimpanzee too), from blinking rates (those who fluttered their eyes more in US Presidential debates lost all elections since 1980) to pupil dilation, eyebrow lifts, and forehead furrows.  Clearly, expression provides major clues about what we think and feel.

Yet no one has mentioned what might be the most intriguing of all apps:  To determine the link between employees and engagement.

Sure, it’s a bit Big Brother-ish (though subjects DO know that they’re being watched).  

On the other hand, how many of our leaders have questioned the percentiles of engagement, as foretold through surveys?  When do we ‘know’ that our teams and staffs have disconnected from their tasks?  At what time(s) would it be prudent to assess the state of employee well being?

The computer knows.  Or does it?

TO THINE OWN SELF, BE QUANTIFIABLE

Athletes do it.

Kids do it.

Even some dogs do it.

The “quantified self” movement has exploded.  Between FitBits, Jawbones, and, yes, FitBarks (among others), two- and four-legged creatures keep score of sleep, activities, calories, and blood pressure through computerized jewelry.  A distant ancestor of the reliable two-plus centuries-old pedometer, digital self-tracking devices are, say retail pundits, running off the shelves.

Or are they?  One-third of wearables’ owners discard the appliances after six months (Endeavor Partners’ research).  Others cite the difficulty in persuading consumers to buy yet another tech gadget.

What’s needed, in our change-mindedness, are a mix of emotional and rational benefits to tout.  Go beyond the black rubber and plastic styles to a more design-worthy objet d’art (maybe Apple’s new SmartWatch?).  Consider tying fitness data output to discounted health insurance premiums.   Start a social media campaign featuring the best and the brightest and most famous … dogs and people.

Here’s a right-brained idea:  Forget the fitness angle altogether.  Why not develop an on-the-wrist device to track receipt of and response to different media, be it corporate communiques or Instagrams, viral videos or business podcasts?  We’re not thinking mandatory, like handcuffs, but a wearable that’s completely voluntary, motivated by a range of individual incentives – small cash awards, exclusive club merchandise, attaboy/attagirl kudos, and IDP mentions.  In turn, the kind of elusive data professionals have been seeking for decades just might be in our grasp.

Sit.  Stay.  Watch?